Net Neutrality is dead. Its official. Edit: FCC's new rules protect Net Neutrality

[Kritic]

i'm all for this sh1t. i want them to raise fees for to access the internet high speed. you know why? cause i don't watch tv and netflix and movies. i don't even know what netflix is or gone to it's website. i just hear ppl talk of it. they should block ppl from accessing all these distractions so ppl can start the revolution . i need the sheeple to wake up and stop watching stupid sh1t on their computers.




this won't mess up with my ebony porn, will it

 

[The Real]

First, if you think there isn't state confiscation of property under capitalism, I don't even know what to say. If you don't think there has been confiscation of property by non-state wealthy elites or companies, you need to read more about the un-incorporated Western United States, especially during the Gold Rush.

I support Democratic Socialism. There are many tenants of Marxism and Socialism, and Democratic Socialism makes the most sense. I see it as the eventual way society will work. I don't think Socialism is perfect nor do I support Marx's opinion of the eventual stateless society or disdain of private property. I also support a Social Democracy model that incorporates certain capitalist concepts as a means of compromise.

You might be interested in this old lecture by the late Oxford professor of Social and Political Theory and Marxist G.E. Cohen. It's one of the most direct and systematic expositions of socialist ideas I've ever encountered:



@Broke Wave , this may clear up some things as well.

 

[little lizard]

you think google fiber won't come through and crush the buildings of these corrupt ISP's tho?

Google = NSA

 

[Good Guy Guevara]

Anyone know why this generation is p*ssy and wont fight back? Damn atleast our parents protested

People in this country do not want the status quo to change. We don't want our pathetic lives to get interrupted. We'd rather the same two parties who have repeatedly screwed this country over somehow change what the last party did. Its insanity at this point

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

@Mook Because the parents of this generation are the ones in power and are forcing the younger gen to bow down in order to succeed.

This is epic bullshyt in general. These corrupt b*stards are probably writing history textbooks for 2016 already with the section The Wild Wild West Era Of The Internet (approx 1995-2014) to sell for 400 dollars to kids up to their eyeballs in debt. Theyve had this planned for a long time and Clayton/Sherman compromise seems to have been one of the last dominoes to fall.

Whats really disgusting, and is being overlooked, is the judicial system. These garbage supreme court justices have been in bed with 'the movement' (for lack of a better phrase) for a good while now. Every decision made leads to another potential loophole in a past law to be overturned for the sake of the profit of TPTB and it is truly a failure for America that those the blind entrust to give them vision have led them astray.

I hope I get my EU citizenship by July.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

Question is what should we do? I think we need to have a gold rush of information download, specifically from places that may not exist in the future. Offbeat information and pictures etc. As much as possible.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

"Tom Wheeler is the current Chairman of the FCC. Prior to working at the FCC, Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry."

Gotta love cronyism!

This LITERALLY could not be a bigger conflict of interest.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

FCC planning new Internet rules that will gut Net Neutrality. Get ready to pay more for the stuff you love online.
Xeni Jardin at 4:31 pm Wed, Apr 23, 2014


— FEATURED —


THE LATEST

FCC planning new Internet rules that will gut Net Neutrality. Get ready to pay more for the stuff you love online.

Tom Wheeler, head of the US Federal Communication Commission. (REUTERS/JASON REED)

The Wall Street Journal was first to report that The Federal Communications Commission will propose new open Internet rules this Thursday that will allow content companies to pay Internet service providers "for special access to consumers."
Under the new rules, service providers may not block or discriminate against specific websites, but they can charge certain sites or services for preferential traffic treatment if the ISPs' discrimination is "commercially reasonable."

Bye-bye, Net Neutrality, and the internet as we know it. Hello, greater connectivity gap between rich and poor in America.

For what it's worth: The FCC's current Chairman, Tom Wheeler, previously worked as a VC and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry.

The FCC Commissioners' email addresses, to which concerned citizens might send concerned email: Tom.Wheeler@fcc.govMignon.Clyburn@fcc.gov Jessica.Rosenworcel@fcc.govAjit.Pai@fcc.gov Mike.O'Rielly@fcc.gov. The FCC's main telephone line is 1-888-225-5322. More contact information and postal mail address here.

From the New York Times:

The new rules, according to the people briefed on them, will allow a company like Comcast or Verizon to negotiate separately with each content company – like Netflix, Amazon, Disney or Google – and charge different companies different amounts for priority service. That, of course, could increase costs for content companies, which would then have an incentive to pass on those costs to consumers as part of their subscription prices.
Proponents of net neutrality have feared that such a framework would empower large, wealthy companies and prevent small start-ups, which might otherwise be the next Twitter or Facebook, for example, from gaining any traction in the market.

From Mashable, confirmation:

In a statement issued to Mashable, the FCC said the draft rules would propose "that broadband providers would be required to offer a baseline level of service to their subscribers, along with the ability to enter into individual negotiations with content providers." The draft, written by FCC chair Tom Wheeler and his staff, will be circulated within the FCC on Thursday, and the commissioners will vote on a final proposal on May 15.
Michael Weinberg at Public Knowledge:

The FCC is inviting ISPs to pick winners and losers online. The very essence of a "commercial reasonableness" standard is discrimination. And the core of net neutrality is non discrimination. This is not net neutrality. This standard allows ISPs to impose a new price of entry for innovation on the Internet. When the Commission used a commercial reasonableness standard for wireless data roaming, it explicitly found that it may be commercially reasonable for a broadband ISP to charge an edge provider higher rates because its service is competitively threatening.
Boing Boing editor/partner and tech culture journalist Xeni Jardinhosts and produces Boing Boing's in-flight TV channel on Virgin America airlines (#10 on the dial), and writes about living with breast cancer. Diagnosed in 2011. @xeni on Twitter. email:xeni@boingboing.net.
​

 

[Broke Wave]

So selective collectivization is appropriate? The world has done that for thousands of years in certain places. I don't see it as fantasy at all, it's very much doable. Plenty of tribes have been documented to work cohesively in this manner. Humans are capable of doing this.



That's your right to believe that.




There is a wide spectrum like I said earlier. Certain tenants believe that for sure, I don't. I support private property and businesses as long as there is absolute, unchallenged regulation by the people and the state holds the regard of the labor, worker, and people above those of business interests in every which way. I support charges of sedition and punishment for any state official who takes what are essentially business bribes. I support nationalizing all natural resources just as you do. Guess what? That's a form of socialism that you believe in. No misnomer about it. Democratic Socialism IS a form of socialism.

Yeah I mean I believe in a lot of socialist tenets but that doesn't necessarily make us socialists. The point I was trying to make about the whole situation is that perhaps a lot of people are getting caught up in Marxism instead of rational reformation of our existing system. I was just making a point about Marxism in general and how it manifests kinda with apathy and young people. That being said I agree with you probably on 99% of policies honestly.

I've been at numerous events with Cornel West (you know I try to stay anonymous on here), and he's always sounded more like me or you politically when my friends get to chat with him than people to the left of us on here (and you have to try really hard to be more left than I am). He's been better at pointing out problems than crafting solutions when I've seen him. So if you didn't come away with an answer that is fine. But make no mistake, there is a lot to be gained from merely pointing out what our objectives should be because from there we gear our resources towards doing it. Though, you're more to the right than I am in a lot of places.

Yeah he didn't offer any solutions but I can't necessarily levy a criticism against him because of that. He's not a politician or economist so I guess I was cool with that. I felt like he was more into cultural issues that I would have liked vis a vis the whole media racism and positive images of blacks in our cultures. He related that to the breakdown of families and used some facts which were pretty cool, I felt like I learned some things no lie. I don't know if he's more to the left than me or to the right but he does seem to advocate more of a big tent ideological change and that's maybe because he was speaking to a younger university crowd than on TV to working adults. He didn't even really tear into Obama because of how popular he is amongst black people in Canada (he is extremely popular especially on campuses)

You might be interested in this old lecture by the late Oxford professor of Social and Political Theory and Marxist G.E. Cohen. It's one of the most direct and systematic expositions of socialist ideas I've ever encountered:



@Broke Wave , this may clear up some things as well.

I promise to watch it but at the time of this response I have watched nothing (disclaimer)

I feel like that historically speaking there is no such esoteric amorphous "thing" that exists called a market, but that as a result of human development, markets exist. So the idea of total government collectivization and a lack of private property to me seems vapid. The great irony is that it is not egalitarian in action only in conclusion. You can't ignore the problems of inequality and market crashes etc by putting your head in the sand. There will always be supplies of certain things and demands for others and human organization and inter connectivity mediates and makes it a reality. Culture plays a large part in demand and we can't ignore cultural demands for something. Muslims are required to go to the Hajj once in their life time in Mecca if they can afford to. If the Saudi gov was communist, they'd give out a ticket to every person who claims to be a Muslim on earth randomly every years in the interest of fairness, rather than allowing whoever can afford to go to just go. While the rich are privileged in going, some people save to go and others go as a result of charity. Some however want to go and never get to. Healthcare shouldn't' be organized like that, education neither (I live in Canada), however all consumer goods in my view should be organized with regards to their relative demand and scarcity.

 

[Malta]

Yet another reason to move to Brazil...

Brazil passes an internet bill of rights enshrining net neutrality and privacy

As if the low cost of living, beautiful landscape, gorgeous women weren't already enough.

 

[Family Man]

And the p*ssy ass tech companies just bend over and take it. Why didn't they take this issue to their users? There're enough losers on twitter alone for them to whip into a frenzy to get some attention on this issue. Shut down facebook or twitter or netflix or google for the day to show these dumb asses what shyt might be like in the near future. That will scare them enough.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

Sad that the pres broke his promise on net neutrality by hiring a FCC individual that went against what he promised he would help friends avoid

“The answer is yes,” Obama replied. “I am a strong supporter of net neutrality.” Explaining, he said, “What you’ve been seeing is some lobbying that says that the servers and the various portals through which you’re getting information over the Internet should be able to be gatekeepers and to charge different rates to different Web sites…. And that I think destroys one of the best things about the Internet—which is that there is this incredible equality there.”

Without net neutrality, the result would be “much better quality from the Fox News site and you’d be getting rotten service from the mom and pop sites.”

Its so dissapointing, friends.

 

[burner]

very disappointed in the obeezy admin over this ,when are they going to stop the utilities from nickel & diming us.my bill consistently rises

 

[Poitier]

Question is what should we do? I think we need to have a gold rush of information download, specifically from places that may not exist in the future. Offbeat information and pictures etc. As much as possible.

I've been D/L webpages that I want after they close the Internet off for a year now.

 

[MostReal]

I new it was only a matter a time